Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!bruce.cs.monash.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!news.kei.com!hookup!swrinde!sgiblab!wetware!spunky.RedBrick.COM!psinntp!psinntp!xilinx!lou
From: lou@xilinx.com (Lou Sanchez-Chopitea)
Subject: Re: Coexisting on the PC
Message-ID: <1994Mar3.190752.16178@xilinx.com>
Sender: usenet@xilinx.com
Organization: Xilinx Inc.
References: <CLz6un.A9G@rex.uokhsc.edu> <CLzu0M.J9s@cogsci.ed.ac.uk>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 1994 19:07:52 GMT
Lines: 32
In article <CLzu0M.J9s@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) writes:
>In article <CLz6un.A9G@rex.uokhsc.edu> benjamin-goldsteen@uokhsc.edu writes:
>> I have a proposition: I think the devices for 386BSD should renamed
>>to better conform to the PC.
>
>I disagree. To many of us, consistency with MSDOS is worthless. It's
>consistency with the rest of BSD that matters.
I diagree that DOS is the motivation. He mentions PC, as in hardware.
The hardware is at least hierarchical to the first two levels he mentions
and a good number (all?) of the operating systems that run on the PC
architecture use the third. I can't comment on the fourth but it does
make sense to go all the way. A naming convention for which you can
write rules instead of lists will pay for itself.
>
>-- Richard
>--
>Richard Tobin, HCRC, Edinburgh University R.Tobin@ed.ac.uk
>
>"We demand guaranteed rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty" - HHGTTG
Cheers
Lou
--
Lou Sanchez-Chopitea EMail: lou@xilinx.com
Senior Software Engineer SnailMail: 2100 Logic Drive
SpeakMail: (408) 879-5059 San Jose, CA 95124
FaxMail: (408) 559-7114 #include <disclaimer.h>